NATO leaders gathered in Ankara this week, solidifying a commitment to vastly increased military expenditure across Europe. This surge in defence spending, framed as necessary for self-reliance, reinforces the continent's border regime and diverts critical resources from social welfare. The summit saw diplomats scramble to prepare a joint statement reaffirming Article 5, attempting to project unity despite deepening questions over US military deterrence.
US President Donald Trump, ahead of the meeting, suggested the ceasefire agreement with Iran was “over” following an exchange of hostilities in the Strait of Hormuz. He threatened Iran with “much worse” after another round of strikes. During the summit, Trump reaffirmed his desire to annex Greenland, criticised his peers for not joining the US and Israel's attack on Iran, and requested the US cease trading with Spain over its reluctance to increase defence spending.
Fortress Europe's Expanding Arsenal
Member states had agreed at a previous summit to raise defence spending to 5% of GDP by 2035. This week, the meeting with 31 other leaders proceeded without public argument, with many eager to display significant increases in military expenditure. NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte framed the summit around delivery, stating that Europe and Canada were “stepping up” to meet US demands.
Dan Sabbagh, an analyst, observed that Europe has reached “acceptance” regarding its inability to rely on the US as before. He noted that Europe had “run down its arms industry” and was now “starting to build.” Poland and the Baltic states are already spending more than 4% of GDP on defence, while Spain has refused to commit to 3.5%. Britain and 11 other NATO countries committed to a £37 billion project over the next decade to build new missile capabilities. Germany may also join an effort from the UK, Italy, and Japan to develop Britain’s next generation fighter jet, further entrenching the corporate capture of European security.
The Manufactured Threat
Critics question the necessity of such a massive investment in Europe’s military. Many analysts suggest Russia has been weakened by the Ukraine war, with almost half a million Russian soldiers reported dead and the country facing fuel shortages from Ukrainian drone attacks. Despite threatening language from Vladimir Putin, Moscow is likely several years away from being ready to attack Europe, should it choose to do so again.
Dan Sabbagh stated that NATO suggests Russia might be ready for another war by 2030, but he found this timeline “very, very early” given the ongoing conflict and the expenditure of lives and materials. He urged reflection on this extended timeline. Sabbagh also highlighted Europe’s population of 600 million compared to Russia’s 140 million, suggesting Europe could stand on its own against Russia with its economic power and technological advantages if a crisis occurred tomorrow.
From Welfare to Warfare
The US has signalled its intention to reduce its military presence in Europe by a third, redeploying naval and bomber divisions away from the continent. This leaves gaps in defence, which Europe is expected to fill at a cost to European taxpayers. Sabbagh noted the variability in the “level of will among European governments and electorates” to bear this cost. In the wake of the Cold War, Europe embraced a “peace dividend,” cutting military spending to build up welfare states, while the US maintained higher defence budgets. This historical shift from social investment to military build-up marks a profound change in European priorities, solidifying a continent increasingly defined by its borders rather than its collective well-being.